A judge Friday moved to halt an investigation by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) into the liberal journalism watchdog Media Matters by issuing a preliminary injunction in the case.
Calling Media Matters a 'Radical Left' and 'Anti-Free Speech Organisation', Paxton he claimed to investigate “potential fraudulent activity” by the group under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act in response to its reports about X — the social media platform formerly known as Twitter.
Media Matters President and CEO Angelo Carusone said in a statement Friday night that X owner Elon Musk “encouraged Republican attorneys general to use their power to harass their critics and stifle reporting for X,” adding, “Ken Paxton was one of them. AGs took up the call and was defeated. Today's decision is a victory for freedom of speech.”
Paxton launched an After Media Matters investigation in November after senior reporter Eric Hananoki mentionted that X had “placed ads for major brands such as Apple, Bravo (NBCUniversal), IBM, Oracle and Xfinity (Comcast) alongside content promoting Adolf Hitler and his Nazi Party.”
X filed a lawsuit against Media Matters in Texas calling the report “deliberately misleading,” and Paxton demanded scanned documents from Media Matters the same day. (Media Matters called X's lawsuit “meritless.”)
Paxton's office requested the agency's internal and external communications about Musk, X CEO Linda Yaccarino and Musk's purchase of X. The attorney general also requested extensive details of its financials, requiring the group to detail any income it receives from sources in Texas, as well as “All direct and indirect sources of funding for all Media Matters for America businesses that include X research or publications'.
Media Matters filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia seeking to block those investigative demands, arguing that Paxton violated his First Amendment rights and sought to relax his “newsgathering, research and operations in X or Musk.”
The organization noted that it “has no relevant connection to Texas,” explaining that it “does not do business with any business in Texas and therefore has never been registered in the state” and likewise “has not registered as a charitable organization in Texas.”
By filing the suit, Media Matters effectively blocked Paxton from suing to try to enforce his office's investigative demands. Last month, Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey (R) jumped in and sued the organization in a state of Missouri court, demanding similar documents, despite the fact that Media Matters is not registered as a business or charity in this state.
D.C. District Court Judge Amit Mehta granted Media Matters' request for a preliminary injunction in the case against Texas on Friday. “Plaintiffs' reporting of matters of public concern are core First Amendment activities,” the judge wrote, arguing that Paxton was pursuing Media Matters with “adversarial intent” for acts “with no apparent connection to Texas.”
Mehta issued an order preventing Paxton from enforcing his office's initial investigative demands and issuing any additional demands related to the probe he announced in November.
“We are pleased that the court intervened today to protect Media Matters for America from a clear attack on the organization's core First Amendment activities,” said Elias Law Group partner Aria Branch, who represented Media Matters in the case . “Today's decision is a victory for free speech and sends a strong message to conservative Attorneys General across the country that futile, retaliatory efforts to investigate progressive organizations for their protected speech will not succeed.”
Media Matters filed a lawsuit in federal court in Washington, D.C. to try to prevent similar investigative requests from attorneys general in other red states where the organization does not operate.
“This is their new tool to go after whoever they want,” says Ezra Reese, chair of Civil Law at Elias Law Group. Rolling rock. “And figuring out how to stop that is very important, not just for Media Matters, but for all the other groups that are pursuing it.”
Paxton, for example, tried to use the Texas Deceptive Commercial Practices Act as grounds to require Seattle Children's Hospital to provide records of any gender-affirming care it has provided to Texas children. The hospital sued Paxton in a Texas court, arguing that it lacks jurisdiction to make such claims. Washington state also has a “shield law” designed to protect health care providers from such requests.
Reese says Media Matters' approach can “pave a path for everyone else that these Republican AGs are targeting to defend themselves.”
from our partners at https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/ken-paxton-media-matters-texas-judge-halts-probe-1235004013/
